We have learned one thing for sure:
There is no single profile of spree killers or other mass murderers. They come from all different classes, ethnicities, geographies, backgrounds, etc.
But most do share certain traits, and the shooter at the fitness center in Bridgeville, PA yesterday fit each of them:
- They rarely snap. Most plan their attack for at least a few days, but often much longer. It tends to be a gradual, evolutionary decision, not a sudden reaction to one event. This killer* "planned the attack for months" according to the NY Times story referencing his blog.
- The vast majority are men.
- Most have experienced what they percieve to be a major loss or failure. This guy complained on his blog about 25 years without a girlfriend, and nine without sex.
“I actually look good,” he wrote Dec. 29, 2008. “I dress good, am clean-shaven, bathe, touch of cologne — yet 30 million women rejected me — over an 18- or 25-year period. That is how I see it. Thirty million is my rough guesstimate of how many desirable single women there are."
The leap from that sense of loss to opening fire on a room full of innocent people is tough for most of us to understand. It will likely be a long time before we see the full picture of this guy, and can piece his particular motives together. But that sense of loss/failure is one of the few common threads we have in most of these situations.
---
For more info, see the excellent report by the Secret Service and Dept of Justice at my Columbine Guide (it's the seventh bullet under item #1). It's specific to school shooters, but much of the information--particularly what I described above--applies to most mass shootings.
* I have adopted a policy of not repeating the names of perpetrators of these crimes as they occur, and encourage news organizations to do the same. Infamous killers from the past--including Columbine, Virginia Tech, Oklahoma City, etc.--are already infamous, and it is too late to unname them. But we choose not to name them going forward, and deny them a measure of infamy which they seek.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
kfujioka
Nick Leshi
Judy Berman
Christopher di Spirito
SaucyB
gaypersonsofcolor
Salon.com
Comments
But if we do that... don't they win in some dark way?
Your work in this area has been invaluable and it is much appreciated. Thanks...
Nearly every time a neighbor is interviewed it is the same thing said, "He seemed like a nice guy. I never would have expected it." Kinda makes one eyeball everyone.
there are some patterns there, which are kind of surprising.
i'll be interested to learn more about this individual.
His ramblings in the blog indicate that this church and pastor were of the opinion that, since "it is finished"...that is, Christ's sacrifice to redeem mankind from sin was completed...then there is no need for "good works" or following in the footsteps of Jesus. In other words...a church that the murderer (I also won't re-mention his name) concluded had doctrinally excused mass murder among other sins. To paraphrase him, he said that according to his pastor, even mass murderers can get into heaven, due to the sacrifice of Christ being "complete".
His rants seemed to show anger at this doctrine, and he called the pastor a "phony" but still seemed to use this to justify his impending crimes anyway.
He has some racist tirades about the President, and how the media loves him...and then digresses twice in the blog into angry rants about young white women loving black men, but not him. He also writes animatedly and with angry envy about a neighbor from whose house he watched a beautiful young woman exit one morning.
It does appear that his online journal has been removed now, though I found and read it this morning. I found it chilling. It is still available on "reddit" I think.
Dave, I don't know how you managed to stay so "close" to the shooters at Columbine in reading their journals and blogs to research your book. I know it had to have been difficult and emotionally draining. Just this small online journal has me churning and wondering.
Many of us, in fact all of us, experience loss, failure, and rejection. What makes some of us rally, some of us fall into despair, and a few of us act out in anger and violence. I'd like to learn how those synapses fire and react.
Intriguing post. Rated.
I wonder if it's possible to create some sort of impetus within the media to stop using the names, as we do with rape victims. I'm not sure where to begin that.
Yek, this guy sounds like an "injustice collector." very common in these sorts. hard to know what's really driving him yet, though.
getting "close" to the killers was actually not the hard part for me. they were disturbing--each in very different ways--but they didn't get inside me (especially not eric). it was spending time with the victims that made it hard for me.
My first response to the SS report saying that 98% of school shooters in their study had perceived a major loss or failure prior to the attack was, "doesn't everyone feel loss and failure?--and sometimes major loss and failure?"
But these people perceive it as significant, take it hard, and fail to cope. 83% actually showed external behaviors illustrating that difficulty in coping.
(see p. 23 of the report for more.)
Why can't they deal with it--or address it constructively? That seems like a fundamental question.
As a teacher, I always wonder, would I know if someone like this was in my class? For one of the killers at Columbine, the answer given in your book seems to be "no"...he was so good at masking his psychopathy that he fooled everyone. However, the other one...the "tortured romantic"...him, I think I might know...see...be able to pick out from his writing. It helped to know that his teacher DID see the trouble in that writing, and DID try to do something about it. I can't imagine how she must have felt afterward...she or the other teachers of these kids...both victims and killers.
Your book helped me put a few demons to bed anyway...so thanks.
It just seems like, ultimately, a real act of narcissism to have this need to take others with you, to "make them pay" for what they did to you. Why don't these people ever just kill themselves first?
Having just read Jennifer Pozner's piece on WIMN about the fact that it's not being emphasized that the latest spree killer targeted women, I wonder what you have to say about these things? Does it help for us to know that the guy went out wanting to kill women specifically, and, if he were such a misogynist, why isn't it more prominent in the news?
Interesting post. Look forward to your thoughts as we move forward.
Jeanette, I think you're right on the money about the extreme act of narcissism. That's part of what makes it so appalling.
Pretend, I wondered about his looks, too. I'm not sure how recent the pix are, but he looked pretty attractive. This was not Danny DeVito. Which begs the question: was he just such a dick that he turned women off, or did he have huge self esteem issues, or was he delusional about his situation, or . . . I don't think we have any answers, but it sure raises some questions.
Thanks, Joseph and Mary.
Lorraine, the news reports I saw all mentioned that it was a group of all women (a women's class) that he fired on, and the NBC reporter I saw made a point of how he targeted women. That seemed appropriate to me.
It also follows a common pattern. Some, but not all, killers target groups related to the perceived villain: eg, if they feel their boss/workmates screwed their career, they open fire at their workplace, if he feels his girlfriend and her friends screwed him over, he'll attack a group of them, if it's a feeling of all women, he'll attack women.
That's one common pattern, so it's not surprising. The coverage I've seen made the connection, but then didn't spend more time on it. Should they? I'm not sure what you have in mind of how you want it "emphasized" more. Let me know.
There is a big difference between hating women and being angry at them. The behavior can look the same, but if you want to understand what's happening in the killer's head and what is driving him, they are very different drives.
(There's also a key difference in non-killers. A man who feels deprived and lashes out in anger, but then eventually finds a girlfriend/wife may have his needs met and then the anger goes away, and he quits acting like a dick. A real misogynist who finds a wife is still going to hate women, and continue the repulsive behavior, because the deprivation was not the cause.)
Thanks for your (always thougtful) replies. Jennifer Pozner makes the point that it reminded her of what happened in Montreal those years ago when the murderer cleared the room of men and then point blank killed 14 women in an engineering class because of what he perceived they were taking away from him.
If I remember correctly, there was a woman who opened fire on a playground full of kids, but I'm wracking (or is it racking) my brain trying to think of these random crimes where women go on such a spree. Yes. I know women are violent at times, but I'm just curious as to whether you have any sense of why, for the most part, it's men who do this. Not looking for patterns of misogyny, per se, just looking for explanations.
I DON'T think he WAS an Aspie, I have taught several students in my classroom with it, and they seldom get violent, but there is something "affectively" wrong about his demeanor. It seems that people actually "felt" it. He describes a conversation with a co-worker at a picnic, saying that she almost immediately asked him, "Did you get picked on in high school?"...he had what I might call the "creep" factor...and seemed to to outward things to try to "attract" people. He had a nice car, a neat home, and he worked out...but it is almost as if the lights were on, but no one was home.
I think your take is more likely and seems spot on...an "injustice collector" and a man angry at women. I like your delineation about the difference between mysogyny and anger at women. I'm not sure, based on his writings, which he was.
P.S. It was great to meet you in Colorado!
finger: he definitely seemed to be targeting women (i say "seemed" because sometimes these things turn out to be random; eg, a person picks a class and it happens to be a dance class that no men take, so it's all women. i very much doubt that's the case here, but sometimes it turns out that way. things that seem "obvious" turn out to be coincidences.)
anyway, he seemed to be targeting women, which fits with what he wrote (at least the part of what he wrote which the media has fixated on. we need to be careful about that, too.)
all the coverage i saw this morning was heavily focused on that.
women as targets is disturbing, but i'm not sure we can make generalizations about the various men who do it. (at least i'm not qualified to.) i have a feeling their motives vary a great deal.
now why men as perps? is a completely different question, and much easier. it's nearly always men who perpetrate mass murder, and for the same reasons that men commit most of ALL the murders and most of the violent crimes, most of the armed robberies, beatings, etc.
even in high school, it's mostly the boys picking on kids, bullying, beating them up. and it's mostly boys fighting each other.
males are just much more violent than females.
i'm no expert on why, but assume it's largely evolutionary: for thousands of years, men were the primary hunters, fought the other tribes (eventually soldiers), policed the tribe (eventually cops), fought off other men, etc. women were charged with keeping peace in the family, creating a nurturing home, etc. the opposite sorts of instincts and behavior.